Are we that desperate for a FS

[blindzebra]

Originally Posted by KDWilliams85

It is interesting. You gauge yourself on how well you do in adverse times instead of how well you do when everyone around you is doing good. Roy set himself apart last season when everyone around him was getting beaten. He's an elite safety.

Ed Reed has had the luxury of a cohesive and lethal defense for his career.

Roy, with the exception of taking out TO, had a bad year last year.

Like it or not Reed is hands down the best safety in the NFL.

It is much harder to be considered the best defensive player in the NFL on a team with several great defenders. It's easy to be a big fish in a small pond.

[KDWilliams85]

Originally Posted by blindzebra

Roy, with the exception of taking out TO, had a bad year last year.

Like it or not Reed is hands down the best safety in the NFL.

It is much harder to be considered the best defensive player in the NFL on a team with several great defenders. It's easy to be a big fish in a small pond.

I was waiting for someone to use the "Big fish in a small pond" comment:

Which would you rather be? A similiarly sized fish in a big pond or a big fish in a smaller pond?

I'd rather be a big fish in a small pond.

Ed Reed's talents are comparable to anyone else who plays on that defense. Why? Because they all do their job. He plays the same all the time. When someone goes down, the weight of the defense shifts to fit who is out there. The Ravens defense is so good because they all can pick it up and run. Other defenses crumble when their star player goes.

Ed Reed hasn't had the misfortune of having a defense collapse around him. So, you can't say that he's good because of only his talent. The others around him blow him up. He can do it all... but I won't say he's the best at what he does. Ed Reed seems better because of who he plays. He plays in a considerably weak division with the exception of Pittsburgh. He rarely plays against a team with an equally effective offense.

The only team that might give Reed some trouble this season is the Colts. Maybe the Packers...

Other than that, Ed Reed will dominate a significantly inferior offense.

Oh... and your comment about Roy having a bad season... him going to the Pro Bowl wouldn't reflect that. Nor would his statistics... still think he had a bad season?

I didn't think so.

[blindzebra]

Originally Posted by KDWilliams85

I was waiting for someone to use the "Big fish in a small pond" comment:

Which would you rather be? A similiarly sized fish in a big pond or a big fish in a smaller pond?

I'd rather be a big fish in a small pond.

Ed Reed's talents are comparable to anyone else who plays on that defense. Why? Because they all do their job. He plays the same all the time. When someone goes down, the weight of the defense shifts to fit who is out there. The Ravens defense is so good because they all can pick it up and run. Other defenses crumble when their star player goes.

[View Full Quote]Ed Reed hasn't had the misfortune of having a defense collapse around him. So, you can't say that he's good because of only his talent. The others around him blow him up. He can do it all... but I won't say he's the best at what he does. Ed Reed seems better because of who he plays. He plays in a considerably weak division with the exception of Pittsburgh. He rarely plays against a team with an equally effective offense.

The only team that might give Reed some trouble this season is the Colts. Maybe the Packers...

Other than that, Ed Reed will dominate a significantly inferior offense.

Oh... and your comment about Roy having a bad season... him going to the Pro Bowl wouldn't reflect that. Nor would his statistics... still think he had a bad season?

I didn't think so.

Roy did have a poor season, IMO, and the Pro Bowl is 90% name recognition.

To argue that the only reason Reed makes plays is because he's on a good defense is ridiculous, he is the best player on that defense.

It's better to be a big fish in the open ocean, which is what Reed is.

[KDWilliams85]

Originally Posted by blindzebra

Roy did have a poor season, IMO, and the Pro Bowl is 90% name recognition.

To argue that the only reason Reed makes plays is because he's on a good defense is ridiculous, he is the best player on that defense.

It's better to be a big fish in the open ocean, which is what Reed is.

I laugh at that. Take away Lewis, McAllister, Rolle, Suggs, Gregg, Thomas, Weaver, and Douglas and see how good he is.

[blindzebra]

Originally Posted by KDWilliams85

I laugh at that. Take away Lewis, McAllister, Rolle, Suggs, Gregg, Thomas, Weaver, and Douglas and see how good he is.

So Emmitt is not the all-time rusher because he played on an offense with Aikman, Irvin, Moose, Novacek, Harper, Tuinei, Newton, Allen, Stepnoski, Donaldson, and Williams?

Laugh at that.

[Doomsday101]

Originally Posted by blindzebra

So Emmitt is not the all-time rusher because he played on an offense with Aikman, Irvin, Moose, Novacek, Harper, Tuinei, Newton, Allen, Stepnoski, Donaldson, and Williams?

Laugh at that.

Yet as good as that offensive line was when Emmitt missed a game due to injury or his hold out we lost games. Heck Jimmy Johnson was almost in tears after losing back to back games while Emmitt was hold out because he knew without E. Smith we were in big trouble. Like you I give credit to the o-line but Emmitt helped make that line better than they were.

[blindzebra]

Originally Posted by Doomsday101

Yet as good as that offensive line was when Emmitt missed a game due to injury or his hold out we lost games. Heck Jimmy Johnson was almost in tears after losing back to back games while Emmitt was hold out because he knew without E. Smith we were in big trouble. Like you I give credit to the o-line but Emmitt helped make that line better than they were.

I used it to prove how ridiculous his argument is, that Reed is only good because of the players around him, I'm in no way doubting Emmitt's worth.

Nor do I doubt Reed's worth to the Ravens defense.

[Doomsday101]

Originally Posted by blindzebra

I used it to prove how ridiculous his argument is, that Reed is only good because of the players around him, I'm in no way doubting Emmitt's worth.

Nor do I doubt Reed's worth to the Ravens defense.

I understood what you were getting at and you’re correct. Players in football rely on those around them to have success. No one is going to have much success if the players around you can't do the job. Which is why most call football the ultimate TEAM Sports

[KDWilliams85]

Originally Posted by blindzebra

So Emmitt is not the all-time rusher because he played on an offense with Aikman, Irvin, Moose, Novacek, Harper, Tuinei, Newton, Allen, Stepnoski, Donaldson, and Williams?

Laugh at that.

Offense is a little different than defense. Here's why:

Everyone behind or on the line is required to work as a unit. If everyone did their own thing, it wouldn't work.

Defense is different because the defensive scheme allows for individual changes instead of a group change. A linebacker can drop back in zone coverage and not affect how the defensive line works. A center can't run over anyone he can and not allow the defense to funnel through his gap.

Ed Reed is the type of defensive player who has to adapt on the fly but has an idea as to what to adapt to. His ability to adapt is what makes him good, but his teammates are dropping him some rather huge clues. Anyone can be good if their teammates can do that.

[blindzebra]

Originally Posted by KDWilliams85

Offense is a little different than defense. Here's why:

Everyone behind or on the line is required to work as a unit. If everyone did their own thing, it wouldn't work.

Defense is different because the defensive scheme allows for individual changes instead of a group change. A linebacker can drop back in zone coverage and not affect how the defensive line works. A center can't run over anyone he can and not allow the defense to funnel through his gap.

Ed Reed is the type of defensive player who has to adapt on the fly but has an idea as to what to adapt to. His ability to adapt is what makes him good, but his teammates are dropping him some rather huge clues. Anyone can be good if their teammates can do that.

It took you almost 30 minutes to come back with that?

Both units require cohesion and both units have adjustments that can occur on the fly.

Your argument is toast, give it up already.

If Reed is only good because of the players around him, than Randy White was not really good either.

Again, laugh at that.

[KDWilliams85]

Originally Posted by blindzebra

It took you almost 30 minutes to come back with that?

Both units require cohesion and both units have adjustments that can occur on the fly.

Your argument is toast, give it up already.

If Reed is only good because of the players around him, than Randy White was not really good either.

Again, laugh at that.

You're right. Both units require cohesion but a defensive unit has more freedom than an offensive unit. A defensive player can practically do what he wants as long as he ends up around the ball. An offensive player doesn't have that luxury.

[blindzebra]

Originally Posted by KDWilliams85

You're right. Both units require cohesion but a defensive unit has more freedom than an offensive unit. A defensive player can practically do what he wants as long as he ends up around the ball. An offensive player doesn't have that luxury.

You are still avoiding the point and I even gave you a great HOF defensive player too.

If Reed is a lesser player because of supporting talent, than so is Randy White.

Or Cliff Harris, or Mel Renfro, or Deion Sanders get it now?

[KChiefs1]

RAND: Game is on at free safety
May 26, 2005, 5:11:30 AM by Jonathan Rand


If you want to see a player get better, just try to replace him with a high draft choice or marquee free agent. It’s uncanny to see the effect that competition can have upon performance. A player may assume he’s playing as hard as he can, only to discover that he can get into a higher gear once his job’s being threatened.


This is how competition is supposed to work, anyway. The Chiefs’ defense has been among the NFL’s worst in recent years because few of the players whose jobs were threatened or the ones brought in to replace them were able to get any better.

That scenario should change this year. The Chiefs have added five defensive players who range in ability from solid to outstanding. Three, barring injury, will be opening-game starters. Linebacker Derrick Johnson, the first-round pick, should get the chance to start at some point this year. End Carlos Hall will be in the line rotation.

The Chiefs, of course, added these five players to upgrade the defense, not just improve the competition. But there’s one key spot at which the Chiefs are hoping that improving the competition will significantly improve the defense. That’s at free safety.

“It’s on, it’s on in Kansas City,” free safety Jerome Woods barked Wednesday after his first off-season voluntary workout. He meant, of course, that the competition at his position is on.

When the Chiefs signed free agent Sammy Knight, a strong safety, incumbent safeties Greg Wesley and Jerome Woods were left to compete for the free safety spot. They were supposed to be among the pillars of a generally suspect defense in 2004, yet both gave disappointing performances. The Chiefs’ defense would get a boost if one bounces back.

Woods, entering his 10th season, has an edge in experience and is the incumbent free safety. Wesley, entering his sixth season, should be in his prime. There’s always the suspicion that a veteran coming off a bad season might be starting to decline.

Wesley has responded to the competition in the traditional way. He’s been working hard, saying the right things and attending off-season workouts. Woods, though, irked Vermeil a bit by preferring to work out back home in Memphis and didn’t show up until the fifth spring session.

Woods is convinced that despite a Pro Bowl season in 2003, he dropped off last year because he never fully recovered from a broken leg suffered in 2002. So he’s been working with a track coach to strengthen the leg, improve his running and get more individual attention than he’d get on the Chiefs’ practice field.

Woods’ approach is unconventional. Coaches like to think their practices, coaching and trainers are superior to any resources a player might find on his own. Then again, nobody else should know Woods’ body as well as he does. So who’s to say he’s wrong?

That point will become moot, anyway, this summer. Whether it’s Wesley or Woods who wins the free safety spot, his off-season approach will be barely remembered.

The best-case scenario for the Chiefs is that Wesley and Woods both come back strong and give the Chiefs a deep and talented secondary. The worst case would be that both continue to slide and the Chiefs are left with a hole at free safety.

Most likely, one of them will bounce back and the Chiefs won’t have a weak link in their secondary. If that’s the case, it’s hard to see their defense as a pushover, anymore.